1

I am describing systems including requirements and dynamic behavior in SysML quite often.

What I come across again and again is the question of how to map the results of SysML structural blocks to an actual UML model, more specifically to deployment diagrams.

The idea we are currently following is to use the "allocated To" attribute of a deployment artifact to describe the relationship to an actual block. This way we can track usage of blocks and/or misusage.

What do you think? Is this a correct usage of the models?

Update: Since there are two downvotes already, can you please be so kind and comment instead of just downvoting? Otherwise I cannot improve/change the question.

Update 2: Below is a sample that describes the relationship of a famous spacecraft and its engine the way I envision it with SysML and UML deployment view. You can see how the engine allocates the block described in the SysML system definition.

Hyper Drive Feature used in Deployment View

7
  • 1
    Are you asking about tool usage? There's a difference between how you relate models or model elements in a given tool versus what the UML spec says you can do to relate elements across models. I'm actually not sure what UML says about how to use the language to relate elements across the models, so I'd have to review it. But the answer is probably very different than functionality beyond the UML spec that different modeling tools may provide. – Thomas Owens Aug 28 '20 at 12:51
  • 1
    My question is targeted towards UML standard, not tool usage. The image just demonstrates the concept. The tools usually allow the mixture of UML/SysML in all sorts of ways. – Peter Branforn Aug 28 '20 at 12:54
  • 1
    Where is the Infinte Improbablity Drive? I don't think that you should use an artifact for it. Though nobody knows how it really works then maybe it really is just an artifact? – qwerty_so Aug 28 '20 at 23:16
  • 1
    omgsysml.org/INCOSE-OMGSysML-Tutorial-Final-090901.pdf is probably helpful. – qwerty_so Aug 28 '20 at 23:19
  • 1
    targeted towards UML standard? I thought you target SysML? – qwerty_so Aug 28 '20 at 23:22
1

As an MBSE person, my view is that the first question should be: "Does this approach work well for my stakeholders?" Allocation of SysML blocks to elements in a UML diagram makes sense to me. However, the more important question is whether the software development team is interested in having UML diagrams at all. The software development teams I am working with currently are more interested in SysML than in UML. Unless the software development is being done in pure object-oriented languages of the 1990-2000 era, the software development team may not feel that UML diagrams do much to make their life easier. (??)

1
  • Thank you very much for the very useful answer, I have a question though: Would you say that the "non UML" developers do not need an overview of a deployment of their solution then? Or can the deployment view also be made visible with SysML? I am talking to "non developers" here, people that understand systems, but also want to know how such a solution maps to their existing environment/hardware/assets. – Peter Branforn Aug 31 '20 at 10:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.